( 2025:JHHC:34486 ) 1 Cr. M.P. No.3860 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.3860 of 2022 ------ IndiaMART IntertMESH Ltd. a company registered under Company Act 1956, through its Managing Director namely Dinesh Agarwal, aged about 53 years son of Late Atma Ram Agrwal, having its registered office at office at, 1st Floor, 29-Daryaganj, Netaji Subash Marg, Delhi-110002, PO + PS-Dariyaganj, District-Purani Delhi, Delhi. … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Dutsun Engineering Pvt. Ltd. through its director Ashim Raza son of Faruque Raza having its office at 108, 3rd Floor, Kamani Centre, Bistupur, PO & PS-Bistupur, Town Jamshedpur, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. … Opposite Parties ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Amit Kr. Verma, Advocate For the State : Mr. Abhay Kr. Tiwari, Addl.P.P. ------ P R E S E N T HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY By the Court:- Heard the parties. 2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding in connection with Bistupur P.S. Case No. 204/2022 whereby the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur has forwarded the complaint filed by the complainant under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with a direction for ( 2025:JHHC:34486 ) 2 Cr. M.P. No.3860 of 2022 registration of a FIR and consequential investigations in connection with the said FIR registered for the offences punishable U/S 406, 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 3. The allegation against the petitioner is that the complainant while searching online for purchase of Tarcoal (Membrane Sheet) sheet came across the petitioner; which is an intermediary running an E-commerce platform and functions to introduce prospective buyers to sellers online and while thus searching online, the complainant received a call from the accused no. 5. The complainant thereafter entered into a commercial transaction with the accused nos. 3 and 5. The accused no. 3 introduced himself to be an employee of accused no. 5 being M/s Lakshmi Industries and the complainant placed an order to purchase Tarcoal sheets worth Rs. 6,62,900/- from the accused no. 5 being M/s Lakshmi Industries. After receiving the tax invoice from the accused no. 3 Amit Saini, the complainant made part payment of Rs. 3,02,900/- only through bank transactions in the account of the accused no. 5 upon the promise of the accused no. 5 to dispatch the materials in the night of 20.05.2022. But the accused no. 3 and 5 in criminal conspiracy with the co accused persons cheated and committed criminal breach of trust, by not supplying the materials. The complainant filed complaint case no. 3271 of 2022 in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur which on being forwarded to the police for registration of the FIR by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur, Bistupur P.S. Case No. 204/2022 was ( 2025:JHHC:34486 ) 3 Cr. M.P. No.3860 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable U/S 406, 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, being India Mart Intermesh Limited is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act 1956 and carries on business to business online discovery platform to facilitate the interaction between the buyers and suppliers of the products with a mission of doing the business easily. Further, its website provides an online platform to the supplier enabling exchange of information between the buyers and suppliers of products and services. It is then submitted that the petitioner takes no part in actual transaction between the buyers and the sellers. It is further submitted that there is no overt act attributed to the petitioner, which could even remotely suggest his involvement in any criminal conspiracy. 5. Drawing attention of the court to the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Dinesh Agrawal @ Dinesh Chandra Agrawal vs. State of Bihar and Ors. reported in Cr.Appeal No. 1356 of 2019 dated 07.11.2019, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has held as under:- “On our query, learned counsel for the State cannot really dispute that the case of the appellant is covered by the exemption available under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 as the appellant only provided a platform for the transactions. On our query, he further states that in pursuance to the FIR, investigations were carried out and there is nothing adverse found qua the appellant. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we consider it appropriate that the proceedings in pursuance to the FIR against the appellant be brought to an end. To that limited extent, the ( 2025:JHHC:34486 ) 4 Cr. M.P. No.3860 of 2022 appeal is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. The parties are left to bear their own costs.” it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is covered by the exemptions available under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 as the petitioner is involved in providing only a platform for transactions. 6. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner by relying upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Radhey Shyam Khemka and Another v. State of Bihar reported in (1993) 3 SCC 54 that in that case, Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has held that criminal complaint must ascribe a specific role to each and every accused. It is further submitted that it is crystal clear from the complaint that there is no averment regarding any specific act committed by the petitioner hence on this score also, the entire criminal proceeding in connection with Bistupur P.S. Case No. 204/2022 is liable to be set aside. 7. Relying upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Sharad Kumar Sanghi v. Sangita Rane, reported in (2015) 12 SCC 781, it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that when a complainant intends to proceed against the Managing Director or any officer of the company, it is essential to make requisite allegation to constitute the vicarious liability. It is lastly submitted that the entire criminal proceeding in connection with Bistupur P.S. Case No. 204/2022 be quashed and set aside. ( 2025:JHHC:34486 ) 5 Cr. M.P. No.3860 of 2022 8. Learned Addl.P.P. and learned counsel for the Opp. Party no. 2 vehemently opposes the prayer for quashing the entire criminal proceeding in connection with Bistupur P.S. Case No. 204/2022 and submit that since the petitioner has been arrayed as an accused by invoking Section 120 B of IPC for criminal conspiracy, so even if he has no specific role in commission of the offence punishable under Section 406 or 420 of IPC still the prosecution can continue against him for being in criminal conspiracy with the co accused persons committed the offence as alleged hence it is submitted that this Cr.M.P., being without any merit, be dismissed. 9. Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is crystal clear that in the complaint itself, it has been categorically mentioned that petitioner is the Managing Director of M/s India Mart, which is an E- commerce platform confined to providing platform for functioning to introduce the prospective buyers to the sellers online and to carry on their business. 10. After going through the materials in the record, this court finds that there is absolutely no allegation against the petitioner that he committed the offence punishable either under Section 406 or under Section 420 of IPC nor is there any allegation against him that, at any point of time, the petitioner was in criminal conspiracy with the co-accused persons. Under such circumstances, this court is of the considered view that continuation of the criminal proceeding against the petitioner will amount to abuse of ( 2025:JHHC:34486 ) 6 Cr. M.P. No.3860 of 2022 process of law and this is a fit case where entire criminal proceeding in connection with Bistupur P.S. Case No. 204/2022 be quashed and set aside against the petitioner. 11. Accordingly, the entire criminal proceeding in connection with Bistupur P.S. Case No. 204/2022 is quashed and set aside against the petitioner. 12. In the result, this criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated the 18th of November, 2025 AFR/ Abhiraj Uploaded on 03/12/2025